Proportionality: An Assault on Human Rights?

Stavros Tsakyrakis

No 9, Jean Monnet Working Papers from Jean Monnet Chair

Abstract: Abstract: Balancing is the main method used by a number of constitutional courts around the world to resolve conflicts of fundamentals rights. The European Court of Human Rights is routinely balancing human rights against each other and against conflicting public interests and has elevated proportionality to the status of a basic principle of interpretation of the European Convention on Human Rights. The paper examines the debate on balancing in the context of American constitutional law and the Convention, and discusses theories which claim that some form of balancing is inherent in human rights adjudication. It argues that proportionality constitutes a misguided quest for precision and objectivity in the resolution of human rights disputes and suggests that courts should instead focus on the real moral issues underlying such disputes.

Date: 2008-11-25
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
http://centers.law.nyu.edu/jeanmonnet/papers/08/080901.html Contents/abstract (text/html)
Our link check indicates that this URL is bad, the error code is: 500 Can't connect to centers.law.nyu.edu:80 (No such host is known. )
http://centers.law.nyu.edu/jeanmonnet/papers/080901.pdf Part of text (text/html)
Our link check indicates that this URL is bad, the error code is: 500 Can't connect to centers.law.nyu.edu:80 (No such host is known. )

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:erp:jeanmo:p0206

Access Statistics for this paper

More papers in Jean Monnet Working Papers from Jean Monnet Chair
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Charlie Pike ().